Filtering spam generates way too many false positives. Challenge/Response schemes are IMHO much more effective. TMDA [tmda.net] and similar programs can be configured with whitelists for your regular mail partners, auto-whitelists for everyone who confirms their e-mail identity, and, if necessary, with blacklists too.
I've been running SA since February, and have had a grand total of ONE false positive out of a few thousand emails. The message was from a new account, very short, and in HTML. That address has since been added to my autowhitelist. SA couple with Amavisd-new and clamav has reduced my spam volume by about 95%, and my virus emails to zero. It's a great product and I'm looking forward to 3.0.
We shouldn't feed the trolls (eh. ACs), but I'll bite anyway, because it's a valid argument.
You also ban all innocent bystanders than send you regular 550: no such user bounces, right? TMDA messages are exactly like bounces if you think of it. They appear automatically generated on purpose. It's a piece of cake to filter them if you dislike 'em. It's not like spam which tries to deceive you.
Now, trying not to be too caustic, backscatter is a fact of life. If you really want to avoid this completely, you
I filter 97%+ of Spam (~175/day) and the only false positives I get are from companies just begging to be filtered. Ie: Easyjet.com, in the (massive HTML) conformation of my itinerary trying to sell, sell, sell me hotels, car rentals and the lot.
Those companies should realise that Spam is a problem end even though they are not spammers, they should keep in mind their messages will be sent through a filter, so better make sure they don't look like it.
Challenge/Response is fundamentally broken. For more information, take a look at some discussions on the topic from debian-user: here's one [debian.org]. There's a few google-harvested discussions [netcom.com] on the topic too.
The arguments used against C/R systems in those discussions all boil down to users' inability to use such a system correctly.
Take for instance mailing lists: if you subscribe to such a list, you should, of course, whitelist that list. Moreover, most C/R systems have built-in safeguards so that they won't send a confirmation message to the list. If you, as a list member, reply to a question, you should answer publicly to the list, so that everyone can profit from your knowledge. Such replies will make it t
"Well hello there Charlie Brown, you blockhead."
-- Lucy Van Pelt
Challenge-Response schemes are more effective (Score:2, Interesting)
Filtering spam generates way too many false positives. Challenge/Response schemes are IMHO much more effective. TMDA [tmda.net] and similar programs can be configured with whitelists for your regular mail partners, auto-whitelists for everyone who confirms their e-mail identity, and, if necessary, with blacklists too.
Re:Challenge-Response schemes are more effective (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Challenge-Response schemes are more effective (Score:3, Insightful)
We shouldn't feed the trolls (eh. ACs), but I'll bite anyway, because it's a valid argument.
You also ban all innocent bystanders than send you regular 550: no such user bounces, right? TMDA messages are exactly like bounces if you think of it. They appear automatically generated on purpose. It's a piece of cake to filter them if you dislike 'em. It's not like spam which tries to deceive you.
Now, trying not to be too caustic, backscatter is a fact of life. If you really want to avoid this completely, you
Re:Challenge-Response schemes are more effective (Score:2)
I filter 97%+ of Spam (~175/day) and the only false positives I get are from companies just begging to be filtered. Ie: Easyjet.com, in the (massive HTML) conformation of my itinerary trying to sell, sell, sell me hotels, car rentals and the lot.
Those companies should realise that Spam is a problem end even though they are not spammers, they should keep in mind their messages will be sent through a filter, so better make sure they don't look like it.
I have nev
Re:Challenge-Response schemes are more effective (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Challenge-Response schemes are more effective (Score:1)
The arguments used against C/R systems in those discussions all boil down to users' inability to use such a system correctly.
Take for instance mailing lists: if you subscribe to such a list, you should, of course, whitelist that list. Moreover, most C/R systems have built-in safeguards so that they won't send a confirmation message to the list. If you, as a list member, reply to a question, you should answer publicly to the list, so that everyone can profit from your knowledge. Such replies will make it t